Colonel v. Mynel Transportation Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Colonel v. Mynel Transportation Corp.

23 A.D.2d 757, 258 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4513

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 5, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 757 (Colonel v. Mynel Transportation Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Colonel v. Mynel Transportation Corp., 23 A.D.2d 757, 258 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4513 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 9, 1964, which granted the motion of the defendant, Mynel Transportation Corp., for a physical examination of the plaintiff by a physician designated by the defendant. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. In our opinion, it was an improper exercise of discretion to grant a physical examination after this defendant, without any reasonable excuse, had defaulted in conducting such examination pursuant to a notice previously served by plaintiff. It was also improper to grant the examination since the defendant had failed to move to strike the action from the calendar within 20 days after plaintiff had served a statement of readiness, and since the defendant had failed to show that any unusual or unanticipated conditions had subsequently developed (Williams v. New York City Tr. Auth., 23 A D 2d 590; Juett v. Paesani, 19 A D 2d 726; Byrnes v. Ban’s Taxi, 18 A D 2d 807). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 9, 1964, which granted the motion of the defendant, Mynel Transportation Corp., for a physical examination of the plaintiff by a physician designated by the defendant. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. In our opinion, it was an improper exercise of discretion to grant a physical examination after this defendant, without any reasonable excuse, had defaulted in conducting such examination pursuant to a notice previously served by plaintiff. It was also improper to grant the examination since the defendant had failed to move to strike the action from the calendar within 20 days after plaintiff had served a statement of readiness, and since the defendant had failed to show that any unusual or unanticipated conditions had subsequently developed (Williams v. New York City Tr. Auth., 23 A D 2d 590; Juett v. Paesani, 19 A D 2d 726; Byrnes v. Ban’s Taxi, 18 A D 2d 807). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 757, 258 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colonel-v-mynel-transportation-corp-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack